Yep.
The verses dispys misinterpret--
- Thread starter Lazy afternoon
- Start date
- Status
Yep.
When individuals on a Christian forum are verbally attacked over and over, what psychologist George Kelly said has to be done. Kelley said that if a guy calls your left foot neurotic, then you have to look at him to see what is wrong with him, instead of looking at your left foot to see if its neurotic.
This is metaphor and dispensationalist-Christian Zionists have a problem with metaphor since they have been taught in the churches that they should use literal interpretation.
George Kelly was interested in how people perceive the world and especially in how they perceive other people. The world is mostly without insight and knowledge on the issue of our perception of other people and the extent to which that perception is objective and accurate or whether something about the perceiver is more important in determining what he or she says about another person.
Other people can be understood, according to Kelley, only by the use of our own constructs applied to other people. And quite often our constructs, which Kelley considered to be like pairs of opposites, such as conventional-unconventional, good-bad, strong-weak, etc lead us to make totally inaccurate pictures in our minds of others. We tend to attribute traits to others which may or may not really be found in the behavior of others.
Then look at making inaccurate perceptions of others as being a violation of Christian morality. Romans 2: 8 says "..unto them that are contentious, but do not obey the truth...indignation and wrath." See I Corinthians 11: 16, where he says "If any man be contentious, we have no such custom." And look at II Corinthians 12: 20. Here Paul says he fears that when he comes back to his people at Corinth that he will find them in debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults."
Using inaccurate descriptions of others, maybe deliberately, to put them down and discredit them, is a violation of basic Christian morality. It is being contentious. Paul in Romans 1: 28-29 has a list of traits which indicate a reprobate mind. Eris, translated in the King James as debate is one of these behaviors.
Quarreling is a good translation of eris. Continued quarreling and personally attacking another individual verbally shows that the one who continually quarrels and attacks individuals is not only not born again, but is highly contentious.
This is metaphor and dispensationalist-Christian Zionists have a problem with metaphor since they have been taught in the churches that they should use literal interpretation.
George Kelly was interested in how people perceive the world and especially in how they perceive other people. The world is mostly without insight and knowledge on the issue of our perception of other people and the extent to which that perception is objective and accurate or whether something about the perceiver is more important in determining what he or she says about another person.
Other people can be understood, according to Kelley, only by the use of our own constructs applied to other people. And quite often our constructs, which Kelley considered to be like pairs of opposites, such as conventional-unconventional, good-bad, strong-weak, etc lead us to make totally inaccurate pictures in our minds of others. We tend to attribute traits to others which may or may not really be found in the behavior of others.
Then look at making inaccurate perceptions of others as being a violation of Christian morality. Romans 2: 8 says "..unto them that are contentious, but do not obey the truth...indignation and wrath." See I Corinthians 11: 16, where he says "If any man be contentious, we have no such custom." And look at II Corinthians 12: 20. Here Paul says he fears that when he comes back to his people at Corinth that he will find them in debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults."
Using inaccurate descriptions of others, maybe deliberately, to put them down and discredit them, is a violation of basic Christian morality. It is being contentious. Paul in Romans 1: 28-29 has a list of traits which indicate a reprobate mind. Eris, translated in the King James as debate is one of these behaviors.
Quarreling is a good translation of eris. Continued quarreling and personally attacking another individual verbally shows that the one who continually quarrels and attacks individuals is not only not born again, but is highly contentious.
Last edited:
:rotfl:
heir
TOL Subscriber
Philippians 1:16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
Philippians 1:17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
Philippians 1:18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
See Isaiah 28: 9-10 "Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
10. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:"
Scripture must be interpreted by other relevant scripture.
"Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
16. The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
17. But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
18. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." Philippians 1: 15-18
"Romans 2: 8, "..unto them that are contentious, but do not obey the truth...indignation and wrath." See I Corinthians 11: 16, where he says "If any man be contentious, we have no such custom." And look at II Corinthians 12: 20. Here Paul says he fears that when he comes back to his people at Corinth that he will find them in debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults."
Is Paul being contradictory, seeming to say in Philippians 1: 15-18 that Paul rejoices even when a Christ of strife and contention is preached, but is speaking against being contentious in Romans 2: 8. in I Corinthians 11: 16 and in II Corinthians 12: 20?
Scripture does not contradict itself, and so we should not jump to conclusions when one set of scriptures seems to say the opposite of another set, but look at them more carefully.
Figuring out what is going on in Philippians 1: 15-18 is not real easy. First of all, we have to realize that Paul here is not saying that a false Christ or a false set of doctrines, claiming to be of Christ, is rightly preached. To believe this would be totally wrong. Philippians 1: 15-18 is not teaching that the doctrines of Christ include a doctrine that says Christians can be contentious. Paul teaches in more than once place that Christians should not be contentious.
Instead what Paul is saying here is that the Gospel of Christ is preached, without any false doctrines in it. If what is being preached includes false doctrines, then what Paul says about another Gospel and another Jesus in II Corinthians 11: 4 applies. Also, Paul in Galatians 1: 8-9 says "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
We have to interpret Philippians 1: 15-18 as saying that even when those who preach the true Gospel are themselves contentious and their views are off in false doctrines, still, the Gospel of Christ is being preached. This text is not contradicting other texts of Paul saying that Christians should not be contentious.
10. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:"
Scripture must be interpreted by other relevant scripture.
"Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
16. The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
17. But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
18. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." Philippians 1: 15-18
"Romans 2: 8, "..unto them that are contentious, but do not obey the truth...indignation and wrath." See I Corinthians 11: 16, where he says "If any man be contentious, we have no such custom." And look at II Corinthians 12: 20. Here Paul says he fears that when he comes back to his people at Corinth that he will find them in debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults."
Is Paul being contradictory, seeming to say in Philippians 1: 15-18 that Paul rejoices even when a Christ of strife and contention is preached, but is speaking against being contentious in Romans 2: 8. in I Corinthians 11: 16 and in II Corinthians 12: 20?
Scripture does not contradict itself, and so we should not jump to conclusions when one set of scriptures seems to say the opposite of another set, but look at them more carefully.
Figuring out what is going on in Philippians 1: 15-18 is not real easy. First of all, we have to realize that Paul here is not saying that a false Christ or a false set of doctrines, claiming to be of Christ, is rightly preached. To believe this would be totally wrong. Philippians 1: 15-18 is not teaching that the doctrines of Christ include a doctrine that says Christians can be contentious. Paul teaches in more than once place that Christians should not be contentious.
Instead what Paul is saying here is that the Gospel of Christ is preached, without any false doctrines in it. If what is being preached includes false doctrines, then what Paul says about another Gospel and another Jesus in II Corinthians 11: 4 applies. Also, Paul in Galatians 1: 8-9 says "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
We have to interpret Philippians 1: 15-18 as saying that even when those who preach the true Gospel are themselves contentious and their views are off in false doctrines, still, the Gospel of Christ is being preached. This text is not contradicting other texts of Paul saying that Christians should not be contentious.
Therein lies the very root of your many errors - your wondering at a thing...
I would not be surprised if you believe in other kinds of "leadings from the Lord..."
It is how the ignorant end up ignorant about a thing to begin with - their wondering at a thing, is taken by them to be "a sign from God."
And once this "Pigs in the Parlor" mentality of theirs is in place; there is not much hope in reasoning with them from the Scriptures.
Their own, self-induced one person cult of the ignorant has replaced objectivity.
I'll bet you take what you too often perceive as an intended offence...far too personally.
The other side of that same ignorance, the ignorance of "this, this must be the Spirit's leading..."
I first read of what I later came to refer to as Behavioral Modeling back when I was about fourteen years old.
I took to it like a duck to water.
Immediately, I found it matched perfectly with a sense of things I'd often had even earlier in my life; back when I was always found taking apart one thing or another out of my even now insatiable curiosity about how things work together.
YOU read (red) "about" that in some book "about."
I found I was merely reading about what I had already known first hand: Behavioral Modeling.
The right there in the trenches, firsthand study of how things - all sorts of things - interact with one another.
Both it and its' principles have long since become second nature to me.
YOU read (red) "about" it. That is all.
Behavioral Modeling is about noting the things that differ or stand out - through their recurrent patterns.
I was doing that many years before I ever really sat down to study out Scripture for myself.
And way before I first encountered ANY Dispensationalists, let alone; Mid-Acts Dispies.
Your recurrent pattern?
This recurrent nonsense of yours and Interplanner's - that ALL Dispys hold to a Zionism for modern Israel.
From what you posted hereinabove, it is obvious to me you missed Kelly's point even as you spout on "about" it.
Dispensatonalism re-emerged as a result of the Behavioroal Modeling of the men who found through it that they had no choice but to respect an obvious, recurrent pattern running through Scripture...
That there are...Things That Differ...
Even devils are depicted in Scripture as being aware of things that differ in Scripture that you and yours find your expert amateur selves having to deny...
Matthew 8:28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. 8:29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
...
In the written pages of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. Consider why Jesus likened the last days to the days of Lot and of Noah, two Bible figures who witness the destruction of God's judgment on sinners round them. They were spared, just like the Church will be delivered from the soon coming worldwide judgment of God upon the wicked.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The rescue of believers in Mt 24 referred to the removal of the Jewish Christians from the destruction of Jerusalem. There is of course the one reference in Thess, but it is also in connection with the DofJ and is the only time that kind of removal was mentioned, and it was very early. The war against Jerusalem was paused and the believers left.
Of course on the last day of history, the way in which believers still alive and those who are dead will meet is through two different routes, but the NT is not trying to provide much about that.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
IOW's those with anti-christian motives, can cite the Gospel, but will be exposed by their contentiousness . . which means the words of the gospel message they repeat may be correct, but their hearts motives may not. So be it.
But believers who desire to proclaim the Gospel, in spirit and truth, must not do so for contentious reasons . . . otherwise evangelism becomes nothing but another worldly sport and politic, to boot.
We do not preach the Gospel to be winners . . we preach the Gospel to win souls to Jesus Christ.
All the tribulation occurred previous to the destruction in both cases.
Lets not confuse tribulation with Gods wrath.
Joh 16:33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.
1Th 3:4 For verily, when we were with you, we told you before that we should suffer tribulation; even as it came to pass, and ye know.
2Th 1:4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:
2Th 1:5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:
2Th 1:6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
2Th 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
2Th 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
2Th 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
2Th 1:10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
What day--
2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2Th 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2Th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
Be guided by Gods word, not by false teachers who have heard nothing.
LA
I have a different belief.
Daniel spoke of 70 weeks, divided between the first 69 weeks and the last week. These weeks are the times of the Jews. The gap between them is the times of the Gentiles.
You did not deal with the scriptures I gave, and then you gave an understanding which is not scriptural.
I know where you are heading but you learnt that view from men and not from the Lord.
Mat 24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
LA
Whatever you do, don't listen to anything LA has to say. Keep that in mind. Her opinions are of little or no worth. She has an angry and hateful heart and mind. She adds nothings to any conversation. Worst of all, she was born without a sense of humor. Stay off that LA Freeway, it's bumper to bumper with false doctrine.
The problem is, you're a Calvinist and Calvinists believe God already chose who He would save and who He would send to eternal damnation before the foundation of the world. Logically speaking, according to your belief system why would spreading the Gospel be that relevant if God already made His choice?
I'm just getting started outlining why I believe the Bible teaches a pre-tribulation rapture. I also believe the verses you quoted are in harmony with what I believe, so I remain confidant that the Lord has given me the right understanding I have prayed for.
"And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28.Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;" Luke 17: 26-28
The problem in saying that the Church, like Noah and Lot, escaped judgment, will also escape judgement in the Tribulation is that Noah and Lot were of the remnant. The Church is of the multitude, and the multitude does not know and/or does not accept that it is in apostasy - II Thessalonians 2: 3-4, and other texts like Luke 13: 20-21.
"And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived." Revelation 18: 23
"Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities." Revelation 18: 4-5
After the falling away God calls those who are his out of Babylon. Babylon is in captivity - to false doctrines.
There was a judgment upon the multitude soon after the ascension of Christ and the Day of Pentecost, in 70 A.D. In the Siege of Jerusalem, Titus led a Roman Army, which tore down the Wall, destroyed the Temple and sacked the city. History reports that over a million Jews were killed in this siege and about a hundred thousand were taken as prisoners.
In a sense the Christians in Jerusalem, mostly of the bloodline of Abraham, can be seen as the remnant, though under James they were not in agreement with all of Paul's teachings, and retained some of the Old Covenant religion. Eusebius says that the Jerusalem Christians got out of Jerusalem and went to Pella before the siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
So, the Jerusalem Christians, mostly Jews, can be seen as a remnant that God preserved, at the time of his judgment upon the Jews of the Old Covenant in the destruction of Jerusalem.
God began his plan of redemption again in the remnant of Old Covenant Israel of Romans 11: 5, "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."
But the Church at the end of the age in the time of the Tribulation is in apostasy and is certainly not the remnant. The Church as the multitude will not heed the call "Come out of her, my people," though a few will come out of her. "And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days." Daniel 11: 33
27. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28.Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;" Luke 17: 26-28
The problem in saying that the Church, like Noah and Lot, escaped judgment, will also escape judgement in the Tribulation is that Noah and Lot were of the remnant. The Church is of the multitude, and the multitude does not know and/or does not accept that it is in apostasy - II Thessalonians 2: 3-4, and other texts like Luke 13: 20-21.
"And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived." Revelation 18: 23
"Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities." Revelation 18: 4-5
After the falling away God calls those who are his out of Babylon. Babylon is in captivity - to false doctrines.
There was a judgment upon the multitude soon after the ascension of Christ and the Day of Pentecost, in 70 A.D. In the Siege of Jerusalem, Titus led a Roman Army, which tore down the Wall, destroyed the Temple and sacked the city. History reports that over a million Jews were killed in this siege and about a hundred thousand were taken as prisoners.
In a sense the Christians in Jerusalem, mostly of the bloodline of Abraham, can be seen as the remnant, though under James they were not in agreement with all of Paul's teachings, and retained some of the Old Covenant religion. Eusebius says that the Jerusalem Christians got out of Jerusalem and went to Pella before the siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
So, the Jerusalem Christians, mostly Jews, can be seen as a remnant that God preserved, at the time of his judgment upon the Jews of the Old Covenant in the destruction of Jerusalem.
God began his plan of redemption again in the remnant of Old Covenant Israel of Romans 11: 5, "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."
But the Church at the end of the age in the time of the Tribulation is in apostasy and is certainly not the remnant. The Church as the multitude will not heed the call "Come out of her, my people," though a few will come out of her. "And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days." Daniel 11: 33
- Status